Source and Item Memory for Odors and Objects in Children and Young Adults

Abstract

Recall and recognition memory for odors are poorer in children than in adolescents. In addition, children perform worse than young adults on source memory tasks using visual and auditory stimuli. However, source memory for odor stimuli has not been examined in children. This study investigated source and item memory for odors and objects in children (7-10 years old) and young adults (18-24 years old). During the study phase, 1 male and 1 female experimenter (sources) randomly presented either 16 odors or 16 objects to the participant. Presentation alternated between sources so that each source presented 8 stimuli. Once the 16 stimuli were presented, the sources exited and a third experimenter began the test phase. To assess item recognition memory, a stimulus from the study phase and a novel stimulus were presented to the participant who was asked to choose the stimulus presented during the study phase. Source memory was assessed with the 8 stimuli from the study phase not used in the item memory task. The experimenter presented a stimulus and asked whether the male or female experimenter had presented the stimulus during the study phase. Results indicate that difference scores between item and source memory for odors were significantly larger for children than for young adults, indicating poorer source memory for children than adults. Difference scores for objects did not distinguish between groups. It has been suggested that the frontal lobes play a critical role in source memory and odor memory--a brain region that continues to develop into adolescence. Poor performance among children on the source memory task for odors may be due in part to immaturity of the frontal lobes.

Developmental differences in memory for cross‐modal associations

“…The results of the present investigation are consistent with studies demonstrating that associative memory for other types of stimuli is worse in children than in adolescents and young adults (Beurhing & Kee, 1987b; Hund et al , 2002; Hund & Plumert, 2003; Plumert & Hund, 2001). The present findings also are in accordance with research showing inferior performance in children compared with young adults on other odour memory tasks, such as odour identification, recognition and recall (Jehl & Murphy, 1998; Lehrner et al ., 1999a; Murphy et al ., 1994; Pirogovsky et al ., 2006).…”

“…In addition to associative memory, there may be developmental differences in memory for olfactory stimuli. Although children match adults in their ability to detect odours, they do not reach adult‐level performance on tasks involving olfactory discrimination, identification or memory (Cain et al ., 1995, Jehl & Murphy, 1998; Lehrner, Glück & Laska, 1999a; Lehrner, Walla, Laska & Deecke, 1999b; Murphy, Anderson & Markison, 1994; Pirogovsky, Gilbert & Murphy, 2006; Stevenson, Mahmut & Sundqvist, 2007). This finding suggests that inferior performance among children on more cognitively demanding olfactory tasks, such as odour identification or recognition, is not due only to immature olfactory sensitivity.…”

A review on the neural bases of episodic odor memory: from laboratory-based to autobiographical approaches

“…The odor source paradigm tests the ability to retrieve limited contextual information associated with the odor perception during encoding. For instance, participants were asked to explicitly remember either a specific room (Takahashi, 2003) or a specific space on a board (Gilbert et al, 2008; Pirogovsky et al, 2009) in which the odors were initially presented or to remember the gender of the experimenter presenting the odors during the encoding phase (Gilbert et al, 2006; Pirogovsky et al, 2006; Hernandez et al, 2008). Overall, these studies demonstrated that odor recognition is superior to the recognition of the source, that explicit vs. implicit encoding improves the memory for the source but not for the odor itself, and that aging affects odor source memory than on odor recognition (Takahashi, 2003; Gilbert et al, 2006, 2008; Pirogovsky et al, 2006, 2009; Hernandez et al, 2008).…”

Subjective Experience of Episodic Memory and Metacognition: A Neurodevelopmental Approach

“…In particular, recent studies have shown that familiarity-based processes develop earlier than recollection-based ones (Billingsley et al, 2002; Ghetti and Angelini, 2008; Brainerd et al, 2012). Research has also shown that recalling contextual information develops later than recalling the information itself (Cycowicz et al, 2001, 2003; Pirogovsky et al, 2006). In this context, Sluzenski et al (2006) showed an age-related improvement in remembering the association between contextual information and factual content between the age of 4 and 6 (see Picard et al, 2012 for similar findings).…”